News Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super vs AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT: Sub-$200 GPU Face-Off

[Admin]

Which cheap graphics card deserves your money?

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super vs AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT: Sub-$200 GPU Face-Off : Read more

 

[digitalgriffin]

Friend: Do you know about low end GPUs?

Me: I never use them.

Friend: So you know nothing?

Me: Not true. I know how to throw them in the trash.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

Friend: Do you know about low end GPUs?

Me: I never use them.

Friend: So you know nothing?

Me: Not true. I know how to throw them in the trash.

I have a GT 1030 and GTX 1630 that might interest you!

 

[thisisaname]

I have a GT 1030 and GTX 1630 that might interest you!

I am not sure who said it "There are no bad GPUs just bad prices" not sure that is still true with Intel's new GPU

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

$200 for a GPU which has to cut corners at 1920x1080 to maintain 60fps in 2022...And there's an article about choosing between which one of these scrap GPUs is better to SPEND $200 on?

Should be an article about how much companies should be fined for generating this eWaste,,,

 

[plateLunch]

Thanks for the timely review. I've been trying to replace a circa 2010 HD6850 for 3 to 4 years now. Then crypto happened and I gave up on trying to get a low end card for cheap. Only lately started looking on eBay for a basic GTX 1650. My PC slot is PCIE 3.0. So you have the prospective market for a card like this correct in your article.

My primary concern is up-to-date drivers because I occasionally see odd behavior with my old AMD drivers. Especially with my KVM switch. High performance is not a concern because I got tired of waiting and built a new gaming machine last summer with an RX6600XT.

For those interested, a basic GTX 1650 with 4GB of DDR6 can be had in the $90 to $110 range now. Sellers seem to be trying to prop prices by setting the starting bids at $100 or higher. But for cards with low starting bids, the demand doesn't appear to be there. Interesting watching these eBay auction games.

 

[spentshells]

1650 super was an enjoyable performer, it was as good or better than my rx570 in most games. I did find the amd card to have superior picture, imho
if you have a pcie 2 or 3 slot, the 1650 super is great.

 

[RedBear87]

"GPU prices continue to fall, but Nvidia's "budget Ampere" cards still sell well above MSRP. "

Quite frankly this is why the RX 6600 has basically no competition right now, both the RX 6500 XT and the old GTX 1650 Super don't offer much value for money, the RX 6600 is a little better and slightly less expensive than the 2019 RTX 2060 and, as long as you don't mind/need raytracing, it's quite adequate for 1080p high/ultra gaming.

 

[Math Geek]

from what i have seen the 6600 at around $250 is a heck of a deal. but if the 1650 super can get back to $170 range, it is a good option for a budget gpu for sure.

i bought one for $169 before the prices went stupid and was very happy with what i got. 1080p was no problem and i just let the game decide what settings it wanted to use. i don't suffer from FOMO so don't care how many boxes get left unchecked.

 

[King_V]

These cards do have their place.

They are NEVER going to get the 6600 or 6700 in the bang-for-buck department, but, in those cases where your options are only "buy a low end card, or no card at all," they can get the job done.

I'm not at all thrilled with their price/performance ratio, but, it's a strange, if recovering, GPU market we find ourselves in.

 

[Co BIY]

How much better are these than current integrated graphics ?

Seems like the most important question for a budget card.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

How much better are these than current integrated graphics ?

Seems like the most important question for a budget card.

So, when I tested Intel's DG1, I included several other GPUs like the GTX 1650, RX 560 4GB, and AMD's Vega 8 using the Ryzen 7 5700G. The 5700G — which is basically as fast as integrated graphics gets, outside of AMD's newer Ryzen 6000 mobile GPUs and perhaps the Steam Deck's RDNA 2 GPU — was 20-25% slower than the RX 560 4GB. Earlier this week, I tested the GTX 1630, and also tested some of those same GPUs as before (like the GTX 1650 and RX 560 4GB). The RX 6500 XT and GTX 1650 Super are both roughly twice as fast as the RX 560 4GB, which means they would be 2.5-2.8x faster than the Vega 8 in a Ryzen 7 5700G. There are going to be cases where the gap is smaller than that, but also cases where it will be larger.

Basically, integrated graphics is typically the equivalent of the sub-$100 GPUs like the GT 1030. A 5700G is faster than the GT 1030, but not by a lot, and a 5700G is also faster than most integrated solutions right now. Still, we could see some decent integrated solutions with stuff like the Ryzen 7 6700H. That might be closer to matching an RX 6400 — slower, but probably closer to that than it would be the RX 560 4GB.

 

[thisisaname]

These cards do have their place.

They are NEVER going to get the 6600 or 6700 in the bang-for-buck department, but, in those cases where your options are only "buy a low end card, or no card at all," they can get the job done.

I'm not at all thrilled with their price/performance ratio, but, it's a strange, if recovering, GPU market we find ourselves in.

Yes they do and a place but in the UK the price is too high for the performance (about £200). Looking at toms new GPU chart at 1080 Ultra the 1650 is 19.4% (26.6fps) and the 6500 XT is 22.2% (30.4fps) .
The Radeon RX6600 48.6% (66.7fps) for £270 and up. £70 more for more than double the performance makes the other two not worth it save up some more and buy the better card.

 

[Co BIY]

So, when I tested Intel's DG1, I included several other GPUs like the GTX 1650, RX 560 4GB, and AMD's Vega 8 using the Ryzen 7 5700G. The 5700G — which is basically as fast as integrated graphics gets, outside of AMD's newer Ryzen 6000 mobile GPUs and perhaps the Steam Deck's RDNA 2 GPU — was 20-25% slower than the RX 560 4GB. Earlier this week, I tested the GTX 1630, and also tested some of those same GPUs as before (like the GTX 1650 and RX 560 4GB). The RX 6500 XT and GTX 1650 Super are both roughly twice as fast as the RX 560 4GB, which means they would be 2.5-2.8x faster than the Vega 8 in a Ryzen 7 5700G. There are going to be cases where the gap is smaller than that, but also cases where it will be larger.

Basically, integrated graphics is typically the equivalent of the sub-$100 GPUs like the GT 1030. A 5700G is faster than the GT 1030, but not by a lot, and a 5700G is also faster than most integrated solutions right now. Still, we could see some decent integrated solutions with stuff like the Ryzen 7 6700H. That might be closer to matching an RX 6400 — slower, but probably closer to that than it would be the RX 560 4GB.

Thanks for the detailed response!

 

[javiindo]

Thanks God Intel is joining the party. I want a graphics card for video editing and I hope the collaboration with davinci will be good enough. For video AMD is no go and nvidia doenst have a real budget option.

 

[logainofhades]

$210 can get you a 1660, which would blow either one of these cards away. Not a great deal, still, but far better than those two cards. If you can afford to spend more, do so. 4gb cards should be avoided, unless budget dictates otherwise. Cheapest of each GPU, on PCPP.

PCPartPicker Part List

Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 1660 6 GB SC ULTRA GAMING Video Card ($209.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4 GB SC ULTRA GAMING Video Card ($199.00 @ Amazon)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 6500 XT 4 GB Speedster QICK 210 Video Card ($179.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $588.98
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-08-09 10:52 EDT-0400

 

[King_V]

$210 can get you a 1660, which would blow either one of these cards away. Not a great deal, still, but far better than those two cards. If you can afford to spend more, do so. 4gb cards should be avoided, unless budget dictates otherwise. Cheapest of each GPU, on PCPP.

PCPartPicker Part List

Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 1660 6 GB SC ULTRA GAMING Video Card ($209.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4 GB SC ULTRA GAMING Video Card ($199.00 @ Amazon)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 6500 XT 4 GB Speedster QICK 210 Video Card ($179.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $588.98
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-08-09 10:52 EDT-0400

And it gets even better when you push to the 2060 at $236.98 . . then the RX 6600 at $249.99. The "just a few dollars more" slope here is way too steep, and, honestly, way too worthwhile.

The RX 6600 stands there going "Yeah, I'm the one, and I know it."

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

And it gets even better when you push to the 2060 at $236.98 . . then the RX 6600 at $249.99. The "just a few dollars more" slope here is way too steep, and, honestly, way too worthwhile.

The RX 6600 stands there going "Yeah, I'm the one, and I know it."

Yeah, EVGA did these major price cuts literally the day after I finished writing this up. Previously it was a solid $50 upsell to get to a 1660 Super from the 1650 Super, and then another $50 to get to the 2060. $40 more for a 2060? Sign me up! Actually, Sunday EVGA had the 2060 12GB going for just $249, and the 2060 6GB had one model for $219. Clearing house to make way for Ada Lovelace, because she's going to want lots of room!

 

[logainofhades]

And it gets even better when you push to the 2060 at $236.98 . . then the RX 6600 at $249.99. The "just a few dollars more" slope here is way too steep, and, honestly, way too worthwhile.

The RX 6600 stands there going "Yeah, I'm the one, and I know it."

Yea, the RX 6600 is quite the price/performance leader right now. But if the extra $50, over the 1650s isn't doable, the 1660 at least gives you 6gb vram. The 2gb extra frame buffer is worth $10.

 

[King_V]

Yea, the RX 6600 is quite the price/performance leader right now. But if the extra $50, over the 1650s isn't doable, the 1660 at least gives you 6gb vram. The 2gb extra frame buffer is worth $10.

Most definitely agreed - and, I realize that I was kind of contradicting my "these cards have their place" post. Of course, I made that post on Saturday, three whole days ago (OMG I WAS SO YOUNG THEN!!), and in this market, well, as Jarred pointed out:

Yeah, EVGA did these major price cuts literally the day after I finished writing this up. Previously it was a solid $50 upsell to get to a 1660 Super from the 1650 Super, and then another $50 to get to the 2060. $40 more for a 2060? Sign me up! Actually, Sunday EVGA had the 2060 12GB going for just $249, and the 2060 6GB had one model for $219. Clearing house to make way for Ada Lovelace, because she's going to want lots of room!

Three days is almost an eternity with the way prices are thrashing about. Fortunately, downward for the most part.

Hell, I got a 6700XT Nitro+ for the "official MSRP" for the reference version, and I feel like I probably overpaid. If I'd've known for certain that the 6700 non-XT was really coming out, I would've held off. Ah well....

A 1080 FE directly from Nvidia was the only time I'd paid MSRP (+$50 if I recall correctly?), and it left a sour taste then. This time, not so bad because I got a premium model for the reference model's MSRP... but I have to remind myself it's not normal. Getting AIB boards for LESS than MSRP is normal.


Ok ok, I'm rambling. But, I've also got one or two friends looking into getting a new system, and I'm sort of piecing parts together for them. So, even though I sabotaged myself slightly, for what I'm putting together for them, if the current/previous gen stuff has prices in free-fall, all the better! I will experience the bargains vicariously through them.

 

[logainofhades]

I bought my RX 6800 at MSRP, but I bought it over a year ago, so I don't feel bad about current pricing. Than non xt 6700 is so tempting for my second rig. The Evga 2060 KO in my second rig I want to use to upgrade my nephew's GTX 970.

 

[digitalgriffin]

The 6500XT and 1650 Super are just not appropriate for anything meaningful.

The 6500XT is hampered by it's lack of PCIe lanes and encoding.

The 1650 Super and 6500XT really aren't powerful enough to play modern games. And they are too costly for upgrading older systems.

Could you use them as a media station video card? Yep. But you could also use a 5300G -> 5700G and be fine for most video services and playing something like Dolphin Emulator.

So both these video cards sit in a hole of not powerful enough, or too costly for entry level functions.

 

[logainofhades]

They are capable of playing modern games. They won't blow your mind, but they are capable. You just have to adjust your settings accordingly, as to avoid using up the 4gb vram buffer. The cards are a poor value, in light of recent price drops, on other cards, though.